Dataset Information

Smoking-Cessation Interventions for U.S. Young Adults: Updated Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Context

Recent data suggest that the onset of cigarette smoking is now more likely during young adulthood than adolescence. Additionally, the landscape of delivering smoking-cessation interventions has changed in the past decade, with the emergence of mobile phone and web-based approaches. The objective of this study is to update a 2010 systematic review of smoking-cessation interventions for U.S. young adults (aged 18-24 years).

Evidence acquisition

Electronic searches were conducted in CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Sociological Abstracts to identify eligible interventions from August 31, 2009 through July 17, 2019. Two independent coders critically evaluated the methodology and findings of all retrieved articles. Data analysis was conducted in 2019.

Evidence synthesis

A total of 17 RCTs and 1 nonrandomized study were added to the original 14 studies meeting the inclusion criteria for this review; these studies varied with respect to sample size, intervention, assessed outcomes, and smoking measures. Of the new studies, 3 increased cessation in the short term, 2 at 6 months, and 1 had short-term effects on cigarette reduction. Pooled analyses supported the use of interventions employing social cognitive theory, quitline counseling, and text message programs for short-term cessation in young adults.

Conclusions

Of 32 included studies, 9 demonstrated efficacy of smoking cessation or reduction in U.S. young adults. There were no eligible pharmacologic interventions included in this review. Findings support the promise of 3 approaches for young adult cessation not included in the prior review: text message interventions, sustained quit-and-win contests, and multiple behavior interventions.

SUBMITTER: Villanti AC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7453837 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundRapid advancements in eHealth and mobile health (mHealth) technologies have driven researchers to design and evaluate numerous technology-based interventions to promote smoking cessation. The evolving nature of cessation interventions emphasizes a strong need for knowledge synthesis.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize recent evidence from randomized controlled trials regarding the effectiveness of eHealth-based smoking cessation interventions in promoting abstinence and assess nonabstinence outcome indicators, such as cigarette consumption and user satisfaction, via narrative synthesis.MethodsWe searched for studies published in English between 2017 and June 30, 2022, in 4 databases: PubMed (including MEDLINE), PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers performed study screening, data extraction, and quality assessment based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) framework. We pooled comparable studies based on the population, follow-up time, intervention, and control characteristics. Two researchers performed an independent meta-analysis on smoking abstinence using the Sidik-Jonkman random-effects model and log risk ratio (RR) as the effect measurement. For studies not included in the meta-analysis, the outcomes were narratively synthesized.ResultsA total of 464 studies were identified through an initial database search after removing duplicates. Following screening and full-text assessments, we deemed 39 studies (n=37,341 participants) eligible for this review. Of these, 28 studies were shortlisted for meta-analysis. According to the meta-analysis, SMS or app text messaging can significantly increase both short-term (3 months) abstinence (log RR=0.50, 95% CI 0.25-0.75; I2=0.72%) and long-term (6 months) abstinence (log RR=0.77, 95% CI 0.49-1.04; I2=8.65%), relative to minimal cessation support. The frequency of texting did not significantly influence treatment outcomes. mHealth apps may significantly increase abstinence in the short term (log RR=0.76, 95% CI 0.09-1.42; I2=88.02%) but not in the long term (log RR=0.15, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.48; I2=80.06%), in contrast to less intensive cessation support. In addition, personalized or interactive interventions showed a moderate increase in cessation for both the short term (log RR=0.62, 95% CI 0.30-0.94; I2=66.50%) and long term (log RR=0.28, 95% CI 0.04-0.53; I2=73.42%). In contrast, studies without any personalized or interactive features had no significant impact. Finally, the treatment effect was similar between trials that used biochemically verified or self-reported abstinence. Among studies reporting outcomes besides abstinence (n=20), a total of 11 studies reported significantly improved nonabstinence outcomes in cigarette consumption (3/14, 21%) or user satisfaction (8/19, 42%).ConclusionsOur review of 39 randomized controlled trials found that recent eHealth interventions might promote smoking cessation, with mHealth being the dominant approach. Despite their success, the effectiveness of such interventions may diminish with time. The design of more personalized interventions could potentially benefit future studies.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022347104; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=347104.

Project description:The detrimental impact of smoking on health and wellbeing are irrefutable. Additionally, smoking is associated with the development of cancer, a reduction treatment outcomes and poorer health outcomes. Nevertheless, a significant number of people continue to smoke following a cancer diagnosis. Little is understood of the smoking cessation services provided to smokers with cancer or their engagement with them. This systematic review aimed to identify existing smoking cessation interventions for this cohort diagnosed with breast, head and neck, lung and cervical cancers (linked to risk). Systematic searches of Pubmed, Embase, Psych Info and CINAHL from 1 January 2015 to 15 December 2020 were conducted. Included studies examined the characteristics of smoking cessation interventions and impact on referrals and quit attempts. The impact on healthcare professionals was included if reported. Included studies were restricted to adults with a cancer diagnosis and published in English. No restriction was placed on study designs, and narrative data synthesis was conducted due to heterogeneity. A review protocol was registered on PROSPERO CRD 42020214204, and reporting adheres to PRISMA reporting guidelines. Data were screened, extracted in duplicate and an assessment of the quality of evidence undertaken using Mixed Methods Assessment Tool. 23 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing USA, Canada, England, Lebanon, Australia and including randomized controlled trials (9), observational studies (10), quality improvement (3), and one qualitative study. Hospital and cancer clinics [including a dental clinic] were the settings for all studies. 43% (10/23) of studies reported interventions for smokers diagnosed with head and neck cancer, 13% (3/23) for smokers diagnosed with lung cancer, one study provides evidence for breast cancer, and the remaining nine studies (39%) report on multiple cancers including the ones specified in this review. Methodological quality was variable. There were limited data to identify one optimal intervention for this cohort. Key elements included the timing and frequency of quit conversations, use of electronic records, pharmacotherapy including extended use of varenicline, increased counselling sessions and a service embedded in oncology departments. More studies are required to ensure tailored smoking cessation pathways are co-developed for smokers with a diagnosis of cancer to support this population.

Project description:BackgroundCigarette smoking is one of the most preventable causes of morbidities and mortalities. Since 2005, the World Health Organization Framework Convention for Tobacco Control (WHO-FCTC) provides an efficient strategic plan for tobacco control across the world. Many countries in the world have successfully reduced the prevalence of cigarette smoking. However, in developing countries, the prevalence of cigarette smoking is mounting which signifies a need of prompt attention. This scoping review aims to explore the extent and nature of Smoking Cessation (SmC) interventions and associated factors in South Asian Region (SAR) by systematically reviewing available recently published and unpublished literature.MethodsThe Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework frames the conduct of this scoping review. PubMed, EBSCO CINAHL Complete, Cochrane Library, ProQuest Dissertation and Theses, and local websites as well as other sources of grey literature were searched for relevant literature. In total, 573 literature sources were screened. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow diagram, finally, 48 data sources were included for data extraction and analysis. We analyzed the extracted SmC interventions through the FCTC. Factors that affect smoking cessation interventions will be extracted through manual content analysis.ResultsRegarding FCTC recommended smoking cessation strategies (articles), most of the articles were either neglected or addressed in a discordant way by various anti-smoking groups in SAR. Key barriers that hamper the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions included lack of awareness, poor implementation of anti-smoking laws, and socio-cultural acceptance of tobacco use. Conversely, increased levels of awareness, through different mediums, related to smoking harms and benefits of quitting, effective implementation of anti-smoking laws, smoking cessation trained healthcare professionals, support systems, and reluctance in the community to cigarette smoking were identified as facilitators to smoking cessation interventions.ConclusionThe ignored or uncoordinated FCTC's directions on smoking cessation strategies have resulted in continued increasing prevalence of cigarette smoking in developing countries, especially SAR. The findings of this review highlight the need for refocusing the smoking cessation strategies in SAR.StrengthsThe review was conducted by a team of expert comprising information specialists, and senior professors bringing rich experience in systematic and scoping reviews. Every effort was made to include all available literature sources addressing cigarette SmC and associated factors in SAR. The review findings signal the need and direction for more SmC efforts in SAR which may contribute to development of effective policies and guidelines for the control of smoking prevalence.LimitationsDespite efforts, potentially relevant records may have been missed due to unpublished or inaccessible articles, unintended selection bias, or those published in local languages, etc. Moreover, the exclusion of literature on under 18 participants and mentally ill smokers may limit the generalizability of findings.

Project description:BackgroundTobacco smoking is the leading cause of cancer, preventable death, and disability. Smoking cessation can increase life expectancy by nearly a decade if achieved in the third or fourth decades of life. Various stop smoking interventions are available including pharmacotherapies, electronic cigarettes, behavioural support, and alternative therapies. This protocol outlines an evidence review which will evaluate the benefits and harms of stop smoking interventions in adults.MethodsThe evidence review will consist of two stages. First, an overview of systematic reviews evaluating the benefits and harms of various stop smoking interventions delivered in or referred from the primary care setting will be conducted. The second stage will involve updating a systematic review on electronic cigarettes identified in the overview; randomized controlled trials will be considered for outcomes relating to benefits while randomized controlled trials, non-randomized controlled trials, and comparative observational studies will be considered for evaluating harms. Search strategies will be developed and peer-reviewed by medical information specialists. The search strategy for the updated review on e-cigarettes will be developed using that of the candidate systematic review. The MEDLINE®, PsycINFO, Embase, and the Cochrane Library electronic databases will be searched as of 2008 for the overview of reviews and from the last search date of the selected review for the updated review. Organizational websites and trial registries will be searched for unpublished or ongoing reviews/studies. Two reviewers will independently screen the title and abstracts of citations using the liberal accelerated method. Full-text screening will be performed independently by two reviewers. Extracted data will be verified by a second reviewer. Disagreements regarding full-text screening and data extraction will be resolved by consensus or third-party adjudication. The methodological quality of systematic reviews, risk of bias of randomized and non-randomized trials, and methodological quality of cohort studies will be evaluated using AMSTAR 2, the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and a modified version of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network critical appraisal tool, respectively. The GRADE framework will be used to assess the quality of the evidence for outcomes.DiscussionThe evidence review will evaluate the benefits and harms of various stop smoking interventions for adults. Findings will be used to inform a national tobacco cessation guideline by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO (CRD42018099691, CRD42018099692).

Project description:To systematically review the effectiveness of community pharmacy-delivered interventions for alcohol reduction, smoking cessation and weight management.Systematic review and meta-analyses. 10 electronic databases were searched from inception to May 2014.randomised and non-randomised controlled trials; controlled before/after studies, interrupted times series.any relevant intervention set in a community pharmacy, delivered by the pharmacy team. No restrictions on duration, country, age, or language.19 studies were included: 2 alcohol reduction, 12 smoking cessation and 5 weight management. Study quality rating: 6 'strong', 4 'moderate' and 9 'weak'. 8 studies were conducted in the UK, 4 in the USA, 2 in Australia, 1 each in 5 other countries. Evidence from 2 alcohol-reduction interventions was limited. Behavioural support and/or nicotine replacement therapy are effective and cost-effective for smoking cessation: pooled OR was 2.56 (95% CI 1.45 to 4.53) for active intervention vs usual care. Pharmacy-based interventions produced similar weight loss compared with active interventions in other primary care settings; however, weight loss was not sustained longer term in a range of primary care and commercial settings compared with control. Pharmacy-based weight management interventions have similar provider costs to those delivered in other primary care settings, which are greater than those delivered by commercial organisations. Very few studies explored if and how sociodemographic or socioeconomic variables moderated intervention effects. Insufficient information was available to examine relationships between effectiveness and behaviour change strategies, implementation factors, or organisation and delivery of interventions.Community pharmacy-delivered interventions are effective for smoking cessation, and demonstrate that the pharmacy is a feasible option for weight management interventions. Given the potential reach, effectiveness and associated costs of these interventions, commissioners should consider using community pharmacies to help deliver public health services.